Thracian Posted 21 August 2011 Posted 21 August 2011 Diverting slightly there should be an inquiry there about their distortion of Kasper's ball-athrowing incident. It is almost impossible to imagine it wasn't deliberately contrived. First comes the comment about the ball being thrown into the stands, which didn't happen at all. And then, despite all the camera angles at their disposal, there is no evidence shown as to where the ball was actually thrown. So who ordered the editing, and why was the editor allowed to get away with contorting/disguising what really happened. The whole thing stinks and leaves a bad taste, just like the referee's actions relating to the sending off and his selective vision about the foul on our left back before the second goal.
sphericalfox Posted 21 August 2011 Posted 21 August 2011 Diverting slightly there should be an inquiry there about their distortion of Kasper's ball-athrowing incident. It is almost impossible to imagine it wasn't deliberately contrived. First comes the comment about the ball being thrown into the stands, which didn't happen at all. And then, despite all the camera angles at their disposal, there is no evidence shown as to where the ball was actually thrown. So who ordered the editing, and why was the editor allowed to get away with contorting/disguising what really happened. The whole thing stinks and leaves a bad taste, just like the referee's actions relating to the sending off and his selective vision about the foul on our left back before the second goal. That was pretty much as it went out. There was no 'extra' editing as far as I can remember from the stream. There is however a youtube clip about from the Trent End which shows the trajectory of the ball and it is not towards the cerntre circle or towards any Florist player.
Super_horns Posted 21 August 2011 Posted 21 August 2011 Had done by with the penalty and red card to an extent if your keeping wasn't aware of the first booking. Mind you the goals you got were handed on a plate too.
Callabinho Posted 21 August 2011 Posted 21 August 2011 Had done by with the penalty and red card to an extent if your keeping wasn't aware of the first booking. Mind you the goals you got were handed on a plate too. Took full advantage of them though, and that's what good teams do, was never a penalty and that is the only reason they got the point. if we had 11 players on the pitch then it would have been a comfortable 3 points.
Leicester Lass Posted 21 August 2011 Posted 21 August 2011 Some of the reactions in here are unbelievable. If the same thing had happened for one of our opponents in front of the Kop you'd all be on your feet screaming for a penalty. Yes it was harsh, particularly the booking, but you can see why the ref has given it. As for Casper, he said himself that his second offence was a bookable one. Whether you agree with that or not, he was stupid to do what he did. The whole thing smacks of inconsistency though, as someone has pointed out about their playing kicking the ball away into the stand after our first, and similar things happening in so many other games.
Corky Posted 21 August 2011 Posted 21 August 2011 I can see why the penalty was given. I still can't see why the second yellow was.
OzFox Posted 21 August 2011 Posted 21 August 2011 Has anyone noticed Boetang climbing all over Konchesky for the second goal? Plus the ref was dying to make a big decision, and in front of the shitty Trent end we had no chance. I hope we smash them fairly at our place so they have no reply! if Konchesky had made more of an attempt to get to the ball, Boateng wouldn't have had a chance to be all over him. Bad defending in my view.
OzFox Posted 21 August 2011 Posted 21 August 2011 Diverting slightly there should be an inquiry there about their distortion of Kasper's ball-athrowing incident. It is almost impossible to imagine it wasn't deliberately contrived. First comes the comment about the ball being thrown into the stands, which didn't happen at all. And then, despite all the camera angles at their disposal, there is no evidence shown as to where the ball was actually thrown. So who ordered the editing, and why was the editor allowed to get away with contorting/disguising what really happened. The whole thing stinks and leaves a bad taste, just like the referee's actions relating to the sending off and his selective vision about the foul on our left back before the second goal. You sound like you're heading into "conspiracy theory" territory. The Oliver Stone of the Championship. The matches are "edited" live by a director/vision mixer. Then later the highlights of that live feed are edited together. Thus there is limited opportunity to change or disguise anything unless they have access to other camera angles and can be bothered to use them. On this occasion they obviously chose not to.
MPH Posted 21 August 2011 Posted 21 August 2011 He didn't f***ing kick the ball... why does everyone think he did!!? ARRRRRRRRRRRGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! calm down. dont get all upset over it. it doesnt actually matter whether he kicked it away or threw it away....
lcfcadam Posted 21 August 2011 Posted 21 August 2011 If the same thing had happened for one of our opponents in front of the Kop you'd all be on your feet screaming for a penalty. Yes it was harsh, particularly the booking, but you can see why the ref has given it. I can see why the penalty was given. NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :banghead: :banghead: :frusty: :frusty: It just was NOT a penalty - what the **** is all this "You've seen them given" bullshit??!! Of course if it was going against our opponent I'd be screaming for it to be given, but after the game I wouldn't say I thought it was a correct decision. There's no two ways about it, no argument, no debate - it was a penalty that should NEVER have been given. I swear if another person says "I can see why he's given it" I'll spontaneously combust or something...
Jiggers the Fox Posted 21 August 2011 Posted 21 August 2011 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :banghead: :banghead: :frusty: :frusty: It just was NOT a penalty - what the **** is all this "You've seen them given" bullshit??!! Of course if it was going against our opponent I'd be screaming for it to be given, but after the game I wouldn't say I thought it was a correct decision. There's no two ways about it, no argument, no debate - it was a penalty that should NEVER have been given. I swear if another person says "I can see why he's given it" I'll spontaneously combust or something... Absoultely agree with this. Just seen it again for the first time and it must be one of the worst, most embarassing decisions i've ever witnesssed. How it can possibly be a penalty when 1. Mills didnt even see the ball or where it was going. 2. It was half a second from being in the safe hands of Schmeichal and was going no-where else but there, and 3. there was no Forest player around and absolutely no chance of scoring whether it hit his hand or not! Shambolic decision which reeks of the piss poor refereeing we're getting used to in this league. Don't even get me started on the sending off and hideously blatant foul for their second. Ref turned a blind eye when it suited forest, and had an eagle eye when it didn't.
OzFox Posted 21 August 2011 Posted 21 August 2011 Absoultely agree with this. Just seen it again for the first time and it must be one of the worst, most embarassing decisions i've ever witnesssed. How it can possibly be a penalty when 1. Mills didnt even see the ball or where it was going. 2. It was half a second from being in the safe hands of Schmeichal and was going no-where else but there, and 3. there was no Forest player around and absolutely no chance of scoring whether it hit his hand or not! Shambolic decision which reeks of the piss poor refereeing we're getting used to in this league. Don't even get me started on the sending off and hideously blatant foul for their second. Ref turned a blind eye when it suited forest, and had an eagle eye when it didn't. Hardly blatant was it? Not a single Leicester player appealed for it. And like I said elsewhere, if Konchesky had made a any attempt to get to the ball he wouldn't have had Boateng all over him. Wouldn't surprise me if Konchesky got the last touch either Might explain why he had his face buried in the turf
Jiggers the Fox Posted 21 August 2011 Posted 21 August 2011 Hardly blatant was it? Not a single Leicester player appealed for it. And like I said elsewhere, if Konchesky had made a any attempt to get to the ball he wouldn't have had Boateng all over him. Wouldn't surprise me if Konchesky got the last touch either Might explain why he had his face buried in the turf Having seen it again yeah i would say it was blatant. Whether Konchesky dealt with the cross correctly or not it was still a foul. And as has been said already, any other time or place it would have been given as a foul all day long. The reff bottled it.
Clazie Posted 21 August 2011 Posted 21 August 2011 Having watched FLS in HD, I can confirm that it was not a penalty.
Corky Posted 21 August 2011 Posted 21 August 2011 Adam, I didn't say it was the correct decision, it wasn't, but I can see WHY it was given. There is a difference. However I do not understand the yellow card. The referee must've believed it was deliberate handball, which is a red card offence isn't it?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.